justaman wrote: However, having actually read the paper, I suspect that it is unlikely to ever make it to actual use due to difficulties in delivery and the fact that they infected and treated at the same time - you would need to take this as a prophylactic for it to be effective, and how many people are willing to do that?
Your drawing false conclusions from the data.
The results of the study conclude that it works when taken at or near the time of infection. It very well could be effective several cycles past infection but that data was not collected. Making the assumption that it would be ineffective doesn't seem to be supported by the available evidence.